An absconder/ proclaimed offender is not entitled to anticipatory bail.

CASE:  Criminal Appeal No.1209 Of 2021: Prem Shankar Prasad  Versus The State Of Bihar & Anr.    Judgment Date: 21.10.2021

COURT: Supreme Court of India

Relevant Extracts:

Despite the above observations on merits and despite the fact that   it   was   brought   to   the   notice   of   the   High   Court   that respondent   No.2   -accused   is   absconding   and   even   the proceedings under sections 82­83 of Cr.PC have been initiated as far as back on 10.01.2019, the High Court has just ignored the aforesaid relevant aspects and has granted anticipatory bail to respondent No.2 – accused by observing that the nature of accusation is arising out of a business transaction. The specific allegations of cheating, etc., which came to be considered by learned   Additional   Sessions   Judge   has   not   at   all   been considered by the High Court. Even the High Court has just ignored the factum of initiation of proceedings under sections 82­83 of Cr.PC by simply observing that “be that as it may”. The aforesaid relevant aspect on grant of anticipatory bail ought no to have been ignored by the High Court and ought to have been considered by the High Court very seriously and not casually.

In the case of State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Pradeep Sharma n (2014) 2 SCC 171, it is observed and held by this court that if anyone is declared   as   an   absconder/proclaimed   offender   in   terms   of

section 82 of Cr.PC, he is not entitled to relief of anticipatory bail.

The above provision makes it clear that the power exercisable   under   Section   438   of   the   Code   is somewhat extraordinary in character and it is to be exercised only in exceptional cases where it appears that the person may be falsely implicated or where there   are   reasonable   grounds   for   holding   that   a person   accused   of   an   offence   is   not   likely   to otherwise misuse his liberty.

It is clear from the above decision that if anyone is declared   as   an   absconder/proclaimed   offender   in terms of Section 82 of the Code, he is not entitled to the relief of anticipatory bail.

Even the observations made by the High Court while granting the anticipatory bail to respondent  No.2 – accused that the nature of accusation is arising out of a business transaction and therefore the accused is entitled to the anticipatory bail is concerned, the same cannot be accepted. Even in the case of a business transaction also there may be offences under the IPC more particularly sections 406, 420, 467, 468, etc. What is required to be considered is the nature of allegation and the accusation and not that the nature of accusation is arising out of a business transaction.

READ FULL JUDGMENT

please share your comments or questions...